Optimize of Low Head Small Hydro Power Project

7/23/2019 Optimize of Low Head Small Hydro Power Project

1/13

Optimization of low-head, dam-toe, small hydropowerprojects

S. K. Singal,1,a R. P. Saini,1 and C. S. Raghuvanshi21Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee,

Uttarakhand 247667, India2Department of Water Resources Development and Management, Indian Institute of

Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, Uttarakhand 247667, India

Received 12 January 2010; accepted 27 June 2010; published online 5 August 2010

In most developing countries, such as India, there exists a large amount of hydro-

power potential. This is especially true in the small hydro plant capacity range of

up to 25 MW. Only a small fraction of this potential has been tapped so far, perhaps

due to higher per kilowatt installation cost as compared to large hydro. Small

hydropower sites can be classified as i run-of-river; ii canal based, and iii

dam-toe schemes, depending on their location. Dam-toe schemes need low invest-

ment and can be developed in a shorter period of time. In the present study, an

attempt has been made to estimate the cost of the low-head, dam-toe, small hydro-power schemes. A methodology for cost optimization of such schemes has been

developed considering the quantities of various items for each component of the

scheme and prevailing prices. Further, to determine financial viability of the

scheme at different load factors, sensitivity analysis has also been carried out. It has

been found that low-head, dam-toe, small hydropower schemes are financially

viable. 2010 American Institute of Physics. doi:10.1063/1.3464755

I. INTRODUCTION

The development of infrastructure is an important factor to sustain economic growth and

power sector is one of the most important constituents of infrastructure. The achievement of

energy security necessitates diversification of the energy resources and the sources of their supply,

as well as measures for conservation of energy. The global electricity generation has more than

doubled in the past two decades due to increasing economic development. Hydropower provides

17% of electricity demand of the world from an installed capacity of about 730 GW.1 Hydropower

stations have inherent ability for instantaneous starting, stopping, and load variations and also help

improve reliability of the power system. It is closely linked to both water management and

renewable energy generation and plays a unique role in sustainable development for providing

safe drinking water and adequate energy supply. Hydropower resources are widely spread through-

out the world and about 70% of economically feasible potential remains to be developed, mostly

in developing countries.2

In addition to power generation, hydropower projects have several ad-

vantages such as flood protection, flow regulation, fossil fuel avoidance, and revenue generation.

These plants have low operation maintenance and replacement cost.3

However, economic and

environmental factors seriously restrict the exploitation of hydropower through conventional large

capacity projects. Due to these constraints, renewable energy resources such as solar, wind, bio-mass, and small hydropower SHP, which India has in abundance, are being considered to meet

the energy demand in an environmentally benign manner. Among all the renewable energy re-

sources, small hydropower, which is defined by different plant capacities in different countries, is

considered as one of the most promising sources. The contribution of SHP is about 1%2% of the

aAuthor to whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 91 1332 285167. FAX: 91 1332 273517. Electronic

addresses: [email protected] and [email protected].

JOURNAL OF RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 2, 043109 2010

2, 043109-11941-7012/2010/24/043109/13/$30.00 2010 American Institute of Physics

Downloaded 22 Jul 2011 to 182.16.241.33. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jrse.aip.org/about/rights_and_permission
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3464755http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3464755http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3464755http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3464755http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3464755http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3464755http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3464755


2/13

total capacity. Technical, economic, and environmental benefits of small hydropower make it an

important future contributor particularly in developing countries such as India, Turkey, Brazil, and

China.4

Hydropower is described as a renewable and sustainable energy resource, meeting global

energy challenges in a reasonable way. Hydropower on a small scale is one of the most cost

effective energy technologies.5,6

In India, plant capacity of up to 25 MW is considered as small

hydropower scheme. The environmental impacts of small hydropower plants are at the lowest

levels compared to other alternative resources.7,8

In India, it has been estimated that a potential of

15 000 MW exists in small hydropower range, out of which only 2045 MW has been installed so

far.9

Large potential of untapped hydroenergy is available in flowing streams, river slopes, canal

falls, drainage works, and irrigation and water supply dams. Most of these hydropower sites come

under low head range, i.e., from 3 to 20 m. Small hydropower schemes are categorized into three

types of schemes, i.e., canal based, run of river, and dam toe. Based on head, these schemes are

defined as high head, medium head, and low head schemes. Low head schemes could be canal

based, run of river, and dam toe, while high and medium head schemes are run of river and dam

based schemes. In the case of high head schemes, there are uncertainties about the geology and

hydrology. Due to these uncertainties, medium and high head schemes are considered site specific.The low head schemes have to handle large quantities of water. Thus, the size of the civil

structures as well as the generating equipment is large. Dam toe low head schemes being planned

on the existing low height dams mainly meant for irrigation systems have established hydrology

and are free from geological and discharge uncertainties. Water availability in rivers is not the

same throughout the year and the maximum availability of water is in the rainy season, which lasts

for 34 months a year. Dams are constructed to store this seasonal water for flood mitigation,

irrigation, and drinking needs. When water flows from dam outlets under pressure, due to the

water level difference between upstream and downstream of the dam, there is a possibility of

power generation. These schemes are known as dam toe hydropower schemes.

It is difficult to estimate the realistic project cost at the preliminary stage to make an invest-

ment decision. A number of investigators tried to establish the methodology for cost estimation of

hydropower schemes based on the existing project data. In low head small hydropower plants, thecost of the power house in civil works and the cost of the turbine in electromechanical works has

been found to be significant. Percentagewise bifurcation of the cost of various components has

been presented and technological aspects were also discussed in the study.10

Gordon11

developed

a simple methodology for checking first order cost of hydropower projects. This methodology was

based on a satisfied analysis of the cost data of 170 projects. In the feasibility stage, accurate

topographical maps, final hydrological studies, detailed geological studies, and sufficient engineer-

ing designs to define the project quantities were suggested to be available. Accuracy of estimates

at this stage is within 15%25%. Gordon11

has developed correlation of the cost of hydropower

projects with respect to head and capacity based on the data available. These correlations are

largely applicable to large hydropower schemes having medium and high heads.

Gordon and Noel12

developed a simple methodology for estimating the likely minimum cost

of small hydropower sites. The study was based on the data of 141 sites. The cost of smallhydropower sites was divided into three components: site costs, equipment cost, and engineering

administration. The relationships developed were based on the generalized conditions and the

specific and unusual circumstances were not considered. These relationships did not account for

specific physical, economic, or business environment of the sites. The methodology can be useful

to discard those sites where cost is higher than the affordable cost of alternative energy.

Literature survey reveals that a number of studies have been carried out in the area of small

hydropower. However, no study was reported so far for cost optimization of low head dam toe

small hydropower installations. Keeping this in mind, the present study was carried out to develop

a methodology for assessment of the cost of such projects.

043109-2 Singal, Saini, and Raghuvanshi J. Renewable Sustainable Energy2, 043109 2010



3/13

II. DAM TOE SHP SCHEMES

A schematic of dam toe SHP scheme is shown in Fig. 1.13

In dam toe schemes, the power

house building is located at the toe of the dam and penstock is taken through the body of the dam.

Basic components of such schemes are categorized into two parts: i civil works andiielectro-

mechanical equipment. The major components of civil works consist of intake, penstock, power

house building, and tail race channel. The electromechanical components are turbines with gov-erning system, generator with excitation system, electrical and mechanical auxiliary, and trans-

former and switchyard equipment. Out of these, hydroturbines play an important role that can be

considered as the heart of a small hydropower station. The selection, type, and specification of

other equipment in the SHP station are dependent on the hydroturbine. The selection of turbine is

governed by head, discharge, capacity, speed, part load efficiency, number of units, and cavitation

characteristics. The size of turbine is defined by its runner diameter. Thevarious turbines consid-

ered for analysis and their part load efficiency are presented in Table I.14

III. COST ANALYSIS

During the investigations, it was observed that the cost of components of civil works as well

as that of electromechanical equipment mainly depends on the installed capacity and head of the

scheme. In order to estimate the cost of various components of low head SHP scheme, correlations

for the cost as a functionof installed capacityand head are developed from the determined values

of cost. Saini and Saini15

and Singal and Saini16

found that the statistical approach can be adopted

for the development of correlations by regression analysis from the determined values.

A. Civil works

For a range of capacity, head, and other related parameters considered under the present study,

cost values are determined for each component based on actual quantities of different items and

prevailing item rates. Correlations for the cost of components of civil works are developed by

FIG. 1. Schematic of typical dam toe SHP scheme.

043109-3 Low-head, dam-toe, SHP projects J. Renewable Sustainable Energy2, 043109 2010



4/13

using the methodology adopted earlier by Singal and Saini.16

It is revealed from the determined

values that the cost is the strong function of capacity Pand headHof a scheme. Therefore, thefunctional relationship for cost per kilowatt C can be written as

C = fP,H. 1

The steps involved for the development of correlation for cost per kilowatt of intake C1 are

shown in Figs.2and 3. The developed correlation is represented by

C1= a1Px1Hy1. 2

Along similar lines, correlations for the cost of other components of civil works such as

penstockC2, power house buildingC3, and tail race channelC4are also developed, as shown

below.

C2= a2Px2Hy2, 3

C3= a3Px3Hy3, 4

TABLE I. Value of part load efficiency of different turbines considered for the analysis.

Serial no. Type of turbines

Efficiency at part load/discharge ratioMaximum

efficiency100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50%

1 Tubular semi-Kaplan 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.88 0.85 0.82 0.902 Vertical semi-Kaplan 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.87 0.84 0.81 0.89

3 Bulb semi-Kaplan 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.89 0.86 0.83 0.91

4 Tubular propeller 0.89 0.88 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.89

5 Vertical propeller 0.88 0.87 0.84 0.79 0.74 0.69 0.88

6 Bulb propeller 0.90 0.89 0.86 0.81 0.76 0.71 0.90

7 Tubular Kaplan 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.89 0.92

8 Vertical Kaplan 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.90 0.89 0.88 0.91

9 Bulb Kaplan 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.93

1600

1800

2000

2200

2400

2600

2800

3000

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

Capacity, kW

Costp

erkW,

Rs

FIG. 2. Plot of cost per kilowatt of intake with capacity.




5/13

C4= a4Px4Hy4. 5

The values of the coefficients in Eqs. 2, 3, and 5 are given below. The values of the

coefficients in Eq.4 for the cost of power house building are different, corresponding to layouts

with different types of turbines and generators, as given in Table II,

a1= 17 940, x1= 0.2366, y1= 0.0596,

a2= 7875, x2= 0.3806, y2= 0.3804,

a4= 28 164, x4= 0.376, y4= 0.6240.

B. Electromechanical equipment

A similar methodology used for the development of the correlations for the cost of civil works

has been used to develop the correlations for the cost of different components of electromechani-

cal equipment. The developed correlations for the cost per kilowatt of turbines with governing

systemC5, generator with excitation system C6, electrical and mechanical auxiliary C7, and

transformer and switchyard equipment C8 as a function of head and capacity are represented as

follows:

14500

15000

15500

16000

16500

17000

17500

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Head, m

CostperkW

/(capacity)-0.2

366

FIG. 3. Plot of cost per kilowatt of intakecapacity0.2366 with head.

TABLE II. Coefficients in cost correlation of power house.

Serial no. Type of turbine

Coefficients in cost correlation

a3 x3 y3

1 Tubular se mi-Kaplan 92 615 0.2351 0.0585

2 Vertical semi-Kaplan 83 406 0.2353 0.0588

3 Bulb semi-Kaplan 76 103 0.2353 0.0586

4 Tubular propeller 91 231 0.2356 0.0588

5 Vertical propeller 89 664 0.2359 0.0591

6 Bulb propeller 72 076 0.2355 0.0588

7 Tubular Kaplan 97 764 0.2356 0.0589

8 Vertical Kaplan 88 631 0.2357 0.0590

9 Bulb Kaplan 79 962 0.2355 0.0588




6/13

C5= a5Px5Hy5, 6

C6= a6Px6Hy6, 7

C7= a7Px7Hy7, 8

C8= a8Px8Hy8. 9

The values of constants and exponents in Eq. 9 are given below,

a8= 18 739, x8= 0.1803, y8= 0.2075.

TABLE III. Coefficients in cost correlation for electromechanical equipment having two generating units.

Serial

no.

Type of

turbine

Type of

generator

Coefficients for cost of electromechanical equipment

Turbine Generator Auxiliary

a5 x5 y5 a6 x6 y6 a7 x7 y7

1

Tubular

semi-Kaplan Synchronous 63 346 0.1913 0.2171 78 661 0.1855 0.2083 40 860 0.1892 0.2118

2

Tubular

semi-Kaplan Induction 63 346 0.1913 0.2171 66 268 0.1882 0.207 35 930 0.1831 0.2098

3

Vertical


4

Vertical


5

Bulb


6

Bulb


7Tubular

propeller Synchronous 61 153 0.1961 0.2111 78 661 0.1855 0.2083 38 328 0.1902 0.2134

8

Tubular

p ro pe ller Ind uctio n 6 1 1 53 0.1961 0.2111 66 268 0.1882 0.207 34 124 0.1897 0.2196

9

Vertical


10

Vertical

p ro pe ller Ind uctio n 5 9 2 64 0.1817 0.2106 70 299 0.1826 0.2125 34 852 01865 0.212

11

Bulb


12

Bulb

p ro pe ller Ind uctio n 6 4 0 17 0.185 0.2031 78 258 0.1833 0.2091 37 513 0.1831 0.2119

13

Tubular

Kaplan Synchronous 70 170 0.1853 0.2053 81 881 0.1858 0.2095 41 982 0.187 0.2099

14TubularKaplan Induct ion 70 170 0.1853 0.2053 72 121 0.1868 0.2082 37 168 0.184 0.2156

15

Vertical


16

Vertical

Kaplan Induct ion 73 624 0.1872 0.2105 77 693 0.184 0.2096 39 199 0.1805 0.2072

17

Bulb


18

Bulb

Kaplan Induct ion 75 048 0.1873 0.2086 85 417 0.188 0.2096 40 096 0.1847 0.2156




7/13

The values of constants and exponents in Eqs. 68 are different for different types of

turbines and generators, as given in Table III.

C. Total installation cost

The total project cost includes cost of civil works, cost of electromechanical equipment, costof other miscellaneous items, and other indirect costs. 13% of the cost ofcivil works and elec-

tromechanical equipment has been considered on account of these costs.17

The total installation costs are represented as follows.

i Cost of civil worksRs/kW, Ccd,

=C 1+ C2+ C3+ C4. 10

ii Cost of electromechanical equipmentRs/kW, Ce&m,

=C 5+ C6+ C7+ C8. 11

iii Miscellaneous cost Rs/kW, Cmd,

=0.13Ccd+Ce&m. 12iv Total cost Rs/kW, Cd,

=C cd + Ce&m+ Cmd. 13

Based on the correlations developed for components of dam toe SHP schemes, installation

cost has been determined for such schemes having different types of turbines and generators.

IV. COST OPTIMIZATION

Prior to 1991, small hydropower projects in India were only developed in the government

sector as government departments were the licensee to generate, transmit, and distribute electrical

energy. From 1991 onward, power generation was opened to the private sector as well and

government departments were streamlined as companies. Since then it has become the commercialsector and repayment of investments is of prime concern; therefore, financial analysis has been

attempted to evaluate the schemes for evolving an optimum solution. In this context, financial

analysis has been carried out to evaluate various layouts. An important part of establishing finan-

cial feasibility is the anticipated borrowing cost. The cost of capital is the return expected by

potential investors and other market and economic costs. The costs are the sum of the real interest

rate that compensates the lender for surrendering the use of funds, the purchasing power, the risk

premium that compensates for expected inflation, the business and financial risk, and the market-

TABLE IV. Values of parameters considered for financial analysis Refs.1921.

Serial no. Parameters Value

1 Annual interest rate 11%2 Annual depreciation 3.4%

3 Annual operation and maintenance cost 1.5%

4 Selling price of electricity Rs 2.50/kW h

5

Annual escalation on operation and maintenance

expenses and electricity prices 4%

6 Life of plant considered for analysis 25 yr

7 Construction period 2 yr

8 Investment in first year 77%

9 Investment in second year 23%

10 Debt equity ratio 70:30




8/13

ability risk associated with low liquidity of long-term debt. A financially feasible SHP project,

where necessary funds are available to pay for it through sale of electricity generated, does not

mean that the project is the best of all the available alternatives or that the proposed execution is

appropriate. Besides, an economically feasible project cannot be financed. Also, the debt limit of

an agency or organizations jurisdiction can prohibit borrowing of additional funds to finance a

project.

Financial analysis includes cost of operation and maintenance, administration, and replace-

ment. Each cost included in the annual cost analysis is regarded to be either a constant value for

the life of the project or treated as an equivalent uniform annual cost by using a uniform series of

annual payments reflecting the life of the project and the cost of money. If the owner finances the

project from internal funds, then the annual cost is based on a required rate of return rather than

the interest rate of the borrowed money.

The layouts of SHP schemes have been evaluated for cost optimization, considering type ofturbine, type of generator, and plant load factor. The efficiencies of different turbines and genera-

tors are different, as given in Table I, which affect the energy generation. To arrive at consistent

values for both benefits and costs so that they can be compared, the present value criterion is

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

1000

3000

5000

7000

9000

11000

13000

15000

17000

19000

21000

23000

25000

Capacity (kW)

CostperkW

(Rs.)

Head 3 m

Head 10 mHead 20 m

FIG. 4. Dam toe SHP scheme with two units.

FIG. 5. Comparison of the total cost per kilowatt as analyzed with the cost data collected for the existing dam toe schemes.




9/13

adopted. The present value has been determined at the time of first expenditure of the future

stream of benefits based on a fixed value of discount rate, considered as 11% in the present stud y.The present valuePV of the project has been computed by adopting the formula given below,

18

PV =i=1

n

CFi1 + di

+ Sn1 + dn

, 14where PV is the present value, CFiis the cash flow in year i starting with the initial investment, Snis the salvage value, D is the discount rate, and n is the number of years of the projects.

The financial feasibility with emphasis on internal financial rate of return has been attempted.

Financial internal rate of return FIRR is the discount rate at which the present value of benefits

becomes equal to the present value of cost, i.e., expenditure. FIRR has been determined based on

the annual expenditure and annual return from sale of electricity generated from the power plant

for 25 years after the plant is put into operation by using an iterative technique. The project havinga maximum FIRR value is the optimum. The financial parameters used for the calculation of FIRR

are given in TableIV.The procedure adopted for the computation of FIRR is discussed as follows:

i Determine the installation cost using correlationsEq. 13 for known values of head andinstalled capacity.

ii Determine the annual energy by using the equation

E = P 8760 T g PL, 15

where E is the energy in kW h, P is the installed capacity in kW, T is the efficiency ofturbine, g is the efficiency of generator, and PL is the plant load factor.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

TS&Syn

.

TS&

Ind.

VS&Sy

n.

VS&

Ind.

BS &Sy

n.

BS&

Ind.

TP&Syn

.

TP&I

nd.

VP&Sy

n.

VP&

Ind.

BP&Sy

n.

BP&

Ind.

TKSy

n.

TK&

Ind.

VK&Sy

n.

VK&

Ind.

BK&Sy

n.

BK&

Ind.

Type of turbines and generators

FIRR

50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

T - Tubular P - P ropellor

B - Bulb S - Semikaplan

V - Vertical K - Kaplan

Ind. - Induction Syn. - Synchronous

Plant load factor

FIRR(%)

FIG. 6. FIRR for dam toe scheme of 2000 kW capacity at 3 m head having different turbines and generators at different

load factors.




10/13

iii Determine the annual cost and generation cost by using Eqs. 16 and 17, consideringoperation and maintenance O&M cost including insurance, depreciation, and interest onthe capital borrowed based on the values of these parameters as given in Table IV.

Annual cost, Ca= Co&m+ Cd+ Ci , 16

Generation cost, Cg= Ca/E, 17

where Co&m is the operation and maintenance cost, Cd is the depreciation cost, Ci is theannual interest, and E is the annual energy.

iv Determine FIRR values based on installation cost, annual cost, annual energy, and selling

price of electricity by an iterative technique.

V. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

In hydropower projects, there are uncertainties on account of water availability that affect the

availability of energy. Thus, there is an uncertainty in projection of the benefits from the project

and the other uncertainty factor is the cost estimation. The cost of the project depends on location,

construction period and variation in cost of materials, availability of construction equipment, and

variation in labor cost. The project cost estimates are subject to a considerable degree of variation

and fluctuation. The benefits also have a high degree of uncertainty. Therefore, projects are tested

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

TS&S

yn.

TS&I

nd.

VS&S

yn.

VS&I

nd.

BS &S

yn.

BS&I

nd.

TP&S

yn.

TP&I

nd.

VP&S

yn.

VP&I

nd.

BP&S

yn.

BP&I

nd.

TKSy

n.

TK&I

nd.

VK&S

yn.

VK&I

nd.

BK&S

yn.

BK&I

nd.

Type of turbines and generators

FIRR

50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

T - Tubular P - P ropel lor

B - Bulb S - Semikaplan

V - V ert ic al K - K aplan

Ind. - Induction Syn. - Synchronous

Plant load factor

FIRR(%)

FIG. 7. FIRR for dam toe scheme of 10 000 kW capacities at 20 m head having different turbines and generators at

different load factors.




11/13

for sensitivity to determine the effect of changes in the levels of the most critical variables. In

order to evaluate the optimuminstallation, sensitivity analysis has been carried out by taking the

following into considerations:18

i installation cost increased by 10%;ii benefits, i.e., availability of energy reduced by 10%; andiii combined impact of both cost and benefits, i.e., installation cost up by 10% and benefits

down by 10%.

Considering these conditions, FIRR has been computed using the methodology discussed

earlier in Sec. IV to compare the results under different conditions.

VI. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

In the present study, low head dam toe SHP schemes having two generating units have been

considered for analysis. As discussed above, the cost for different components of low head dam

toe SHP scheme has been computed based on the actual quantities of various items and their

prevailing prices. The computed cost data were used to develop the correlations based on the

available method.15,16

The process for developing correlation has been shown in Figs. 2 and 3.

Based on the correlation developed, installation cost has been determined for different heads and

capacities, as shown in Fig. 4. In order to verify the validity of the developed correlations, a

comparison was made between cost determined by using correlation and cost data collected for

similar plants installed recently. As shown in Fig. 5, it has been found that there is a maximum

deviation of11%. This shows the accuracy of the developed correlation. The factors responsible

for this variation can be geological/soil conditions, type of turbine, type of generator, and location

of site.

Based on the determined installation cost and parameters given in TableIV,financial analysis

has been carried out to determine the financial internal rate of return for different layouts using

different types of turbines and generators at different load factors. FIRR values for different

layouts of dam toe schemes having capacity of 2000 kW at 3 m head and 10 000 kW at 20 m head

have been considered. It is seen from Figs.6 and 7 that at 50% load factor, a bulb turbine with a

Kaplan runner is the optimum layout having maximum FIRR, i.e., 3.80% and 15.50%, respec-

tively. At 60%, 70%, and 80% load factors, a tubular turbine having a semi-Kaplan runner is found

to be the optimum layout with maximum FIRR values. At 90% load factor, a tubular turbine with

a propeller runner is found as the optimum layout with maximum FIRR value. To account for

TABLE V. Financial internal rate of return % at different load factors under different conditions.

Serial no. Conditions

Load factor

50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

At 3 m head and 2000 kW capacity1 Normal condition 3.80 7.50 11.00 14.00 16.60

2 Installation cost increased by 10% 2.03 5.78 9.20 12.11 14.60

3 Generation reduced by 10% 1.84 5.60 9.02 11.92 14.39

4

Installation cost increased by 10% and generation

reduced by 10% 0.06 3.86 7.29 10.13 12.52

At 20 m head and 10 000 kW capacity

5 Normal condition 15.50 19.70 24.30 28.50 32.34

6 Installation cost increased by 10% 13.62 17.56 21.89 25.87 29.46

7 Generation reduced by 10% 13.43 17.34 21.64 25.60 29.16

8

Installation cost increased by 10% and generation

reduced by 10% 11.59 15.34 19.41 23.13 26.48




12/13

uncertainties, sensitivity analysis has been carried out by escalating installation cost and/or reduc-

ing energy generation benefits. The determined values of FIRR under these conditions are given

in TableV.It is seen that the layouts having higher capacities and head are financially viable at all

load factors in all conditions, while layouts having smaller capacities and lower heads are finan-

cially viable at load factors more than 70% in normal conditions and at 90% in extreme

conditions.

VII. CONCLUSIONS

Financial feasibility quantifies a projects ability to obtain funds for implementation and

repayment of funds on a self-liquidating basis. In the present study, methodology to determine the

optimum layout of dam toe SHP schemes has been evolved. It has been found that at a higher load

factor, i.e., 90%, a tubular turbine with a propeller runner is the optimum layout with maximum

FIRR value. At 60%, 70%, and 80% load factors, a tubular turbine having a semi-Kaplan runner

is the optimum layout, while a bulb turbine with a Kaplan runner is the optimum layout at 50%

load factor. Sensitivity analysis shows that the layouts having higher capacities have a financial

internal rate of return values higher than the interest rate. Therefore, these sites are considered to

be financially viable at all load factors under all conditions.

Nomenclature

a1 a8 Coefficients

Ca Annual cost, Rs

Cd Total cost per kilowatt, Rs

Cg Generation cost, Rs

Ci Interest cost, Rs

C1 Cost per kilowatt of intake, Rs

C2 Cost per kilowatt of penstock, Rs

C3 Cost per kilowatt of power house building, Rs

C4 Cost per kilowatt of tailrace channel, Rs

C5 Cost per kilowatt of turbines with governing system, RsC6 Cost per kilowatt of generator with excitation system, Rs

C7 Cost per kilowatt of electrical and mechanical auxiliary, Rs

C8 Cost per kilowatt of transformer and switchyard equipment, Rs.

Ccd Cost per kilowatt of civil works, Rs

Ce&m Cost per kilowatt of electromechanical equipment, Rs

Cmd Cost per kilowatt of miscellaneous items, Rs

CFi Cash flow in ith year

D Discount rate

E Annual energy generation in kW h

g Efficiency of generatorT Efficiency of turbine

FIRR Financial internal rate of return, %

H Rated net head in meter

kW Kilowatt

MW Megawatt

M Meter

N Last year of cash flow

P Rated output power, kW

PL Load factor

PV Present value

Rs Indian rupees 1 US $=45 Indian Rs

Sn Salvage value




13/13

SHP Small hydropower

x1 , . . . , x8 Coefficients

y1 , . . . , y8 Coefficients

1 I. Yuksel, Energy Sources, Part-B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 2, 113 2007.2

I. Yuksel,Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 12, 1622 2008.3I. Yuksel, Energy Sources, Part-B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 4, 100 2009.

4 I. Yuksel, Energy Sources, Part-B: Economics, Planning, and Policy 4, 377 2009.5 G. W. Frey and D. M. Linke, Energy Policy 30, 1261 2002.6 O. Paish,Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 6, 537 2002.7 I. Yuksel, Energy Sources, Part-A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects 31, 1915 2009.8

I. Yuksel,Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 14, 462 2010.9

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India, Annual Report, 2008.10 K. R. Broome and R. N. Weisman, Int. J. Hydropow. Dams 2, 48 1995.11J. L. Gordon, Int. Water Power Dam Constr. 35, 30 1983.12 J. L. Gordon and R. C. R. Noel, Int. Water Power Dam Constr. 38, 23 1986.13 AHEC, Study on design and development of model SHP based self sustained projects, Alternate Hydro Energy Centre,

IIT Roorkee, 2003.14 J. G. Brown, Hydro-Electric Engineering Practice CBS, New Delhi, 1984.15 R. P. Saini and J. S. Saini, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 40, 973 1997.16 S. K. Singal and R. P. Saini, Renewable Energy 33, 2549 2008.17 CEA, Guidelines for Development of Small Hydro-Electric Schemes, Government of India, New Delhi, 1982.18

C. S. Raghuvanshi, Management and Organisation of Irrigation System Atlantic Publishers and Distributors, NewDelhi, 2005.

19 F. Forouzbakhsh, S. M. H. Hosseini, and M. Vakilian, Energy Policy 35, 1013 2007.20 Ministry of Power, Government of India, Investment Promotion Cell, Indias electricity sector-widening scope for

private participation, 2006.21 Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission Notification No. UPERC/Secy/Regulation/05-248 2005 at www.u-

perc.org.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567240600705201http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2007.01.024http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567240701425808http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567240701756897http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00086-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1364-0321(02)00006-0http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567030802462911http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.07.025http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0017-9310(96)00019-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.02.010http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.02.004http://www.uperc.org/http://www.uperc.org/http://www.uperc.org/http://www.uperc.org/http://www.uperc.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.02.004http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.02.010http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0017-9310(96)00019-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.07.025http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567030802462911http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1364-0321(02)00006-0http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00086-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567240701756897http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567240701425808http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2007.01.024http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15567240600705201

Optimize of Low Head Small Hydro Power Project

Documents